I propose that the petitions considered by the committee at this meeting and previous meetings and the replies from Departments and other bodies be published. Is that agreed? Agreed.

We have five petitions this evening. The first concerns reform of Seanad Éireann, a petition submitted by Mr. Tomás Heneghan.

The correspondence from the Clerk of Seanad Éireann, which I propose that we forward to the petitioner, does not leave us with much wiggle room, shall we say. Based on the response received from the Clerk of Seanad Éireann, I propose that we close this petition and advise the petitioner that this petition cannot be progressed further by this committee. Is that agreed? Agreed.

No. P00051/25 relates to amendment of the Credit Union Act 1997, and was submitted by Mr. Brian Gould. The correspondence from the Department of Finance is unequivocal. It says very starkly that there are currently no plans to make legislative changes to the methods by which credit union AGMs can be held. This is us effectively having been shut down. We cannot progress this petition, which I think is regrettable. The response from the Department, however, does not leave us with very much wiggle room. I am in the hands of the members. I cannot see a way in which we can progress this petition and I think, therefore, we would have no option but to close the petition. I am happy to hear back from the petitioner, however, if he would like to correspond with the committee. We are going to send him the correspondence from the Department of Finance. As I said, it is a very stark response. Do the members want to close the petition now or do we want to hear whether the petitioner has any particular views he would like to share with us? I call Deputy Buckley.

I will just throw this out to the committee. The response we got from the Department is very detailed. We only have a certain remit in this committee. We have other petitions in line and coming down on us like a tsunami. It would be an injustice to the petitioner and to the committee if we start to string this matter out. The answer is thorough enough. If it was down to me, I would write back to the petitioner but I would also close it. That is my take on it.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Our third petition, P00070/25, is for Ireland to put sepsis management and awareness on the agenda for its EU Presidency. It is from the North East Sepsis Awareness, NESA, group. We had a really valuable session in this regard. I think every time this committee, and any committee, gets the chance to discuss sepsis is important. When we had that session and the discussion, it was very much apparent that we had all had experience at some point of sepsis and sepsis management. So many of us have those positive stories of a person for whom it was caught at the right time. For every one of those stories, I fear there are others where public awareness was not what it should have been or we did not get the result that the families would have wanted, unfortunately.

We have correspondence from the Department of Health and from the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade. The proposal is that we will forward this correspondence to the petitioner and receive their comments within 14 days. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Professor Steve Kerrigan from the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, RCSI, and other advocates, were here discussing this issue. A number of advocates in my constituency and county have been very active in getting information out in relation to the dangers associated with this infection. We should push anything we can, as much as possible, to support those advocates, along with the very professional work of Professor Steve Kerrigan and other groups.

I wholeheartedly agree with Deputy Smith. I would also add to that the work done by Ciarán Staunton and others.

Yes.

He has presented on this issue. We are doing good work every time he comes here to raise awareness and every time we have this conversation. Deputy Smith is right that his own constituents represented the issue incredibly well when they were here. Every chance we can get to have this conversation allows us to do our own bit as well to raise awareness. We all agree that this is something that can and should be dealt with. There are no politics in this.

No. P00012/26 relates to the reform of foreign birth registration citizenship transmission provisions, and was submitted by Mr. Anthony Fox. We have correspondence from the petitioner. The proposal is that we will forward this correspondence to the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration for its comment within a fortnight. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The final petition is No. P00014/25, relating to the reform of Irish laws on pet theft 2025, and was submitted by Ms Lisa O'Connor. We had a very emotional meeting on this issue. Everybody agreed that your pet is more valuable than a lawnmower or whatever might be robbed off you. A lot of feeling was expressed and the petitioner and those accompanying her were very much at pains to point out to us how much their domestic pets are part of their families and how hurtful they believe it is to have the theft of a family pet treated in the same way as that of a lawnmower or something else.

We exchanged correspondence with the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration and also with the Department of agriculture. This is an issue for which, unfortunately, a number of Departments are responsible and it falls through the cracks. We have correspondence from the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration outlining for us the work being done, and pointing out to us that this is an area which comes under the remit of the committee with responsibility for rural affairs and community development. The response from the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration indicates that the Minister does not believe he needs to attend, and it gives us a brief synopsis of the work. We will forward the correspondence from both Departments to the petitioner for her comments. Before we do that, though, I will throw the matter open to the members to see if they have any views. I call Senator Andrews.

The response from the Minister's office is really disappointing. Having made two or three requests already in this regard, and those having got lost, it is very disappointing that a petitioner, who, as the Cathaoirleach said, submitted a very strong, powerful petition, has been effectively ignored. To be honest, this response misses the point. My understanding is that people are very attached to their pets, whether that is a cat, a dog, a horse, a donkey or whatever. This response is the same one the Department gives almost every time to an issue of concern around welfare.

When we see some of the offences committed against animals, the brutal treatment of horses and dogs, and the neglect, the reality is that there are no real consequences for people who abuse their pets. This response misses the point. The petitioner and those accompanying her were making the point that these pets are sentient beings and not inanimate objects like a remote control or someone's television. The theft of these pets cannot be treated the same. If they are being treated the same, the punishments meted out will not be strong enough. We need to ensure that the Minister comes in to the committee. If it is not the Minister himself who comes in, it should be his team. Let us have that discussion so we can highlight where the Department is missing the point and that this matter is about welfare and recognising that pets are, as I said, sentient beings and need to be treated differently from your kitchen table that may be stolen or whatever else it might be.

I feel we need to get representatives in from the Department urgently because there is an animal welfare crisis, especially concerning dogs, in this country. Rescue centres are overflowing with animals and struggling to cope. There are no consequences for people who abuse their pets. When pets go missing, there have to be consequences above and beyond these thefts being treated like the theft of a TV or something similar. We need to get the Minister or his officials to come in to the committee to look at this issue further. The petitioner and those other advocates at least deserve this, as well as some respect for caring for dogs and other pets.

Absolutely, and their passion was very evident. Deputy Buckley, please.

I echo what Senator Andrews said. I am not into material stuff. If a bike is stolen from the back or front of a house, it is just a bike. However, I have two boxer dogs and with them I would be genuinely upset, because you get attached to them. The remote will not come up and hug you but a dog will. Whatever the crime is, you have to find the balance. Where there is an action, there is an instant reaction. Whatever the crime is, the punishment should meet that standard and emotional trauma is a form of abuse, regardless of whether it is something done directly to a person or the removal of their pets, or whatever. I am disappointed the Minister is just brushing it away. As Senator Andrews said, I would like to see us bringing in either the Minister or the officials. They need to hear what we have heard from the witnesses and the statements and put a bit of empathy back into the discussion. It is not plastic, it is not metal, it is material that is functional. It gives you passion in life but also fulfilment and anything like that which is taken away from you is more than just basic theft.

I want to record that on behalf of the Minister a staff member wrote that the theft of pets is an incredibly cruel crime that causes huge trauma for pet owners all over the country. They said the Minister fully appreciates the strong attachment that we all have to our pets and that theft not only leads to their loss in our lives but also a high level of concern for their welfare. That is therefore acknowledged but I am very disappointed we have been told the Minister has limited availability for any non-essential business. I am sure our petitioners feel their petition is essential business. We can forward the correspondence from both Departments to the petitioner, but as I suggested there I think we will write back to the Department of justice and request that if the Minister is not available, or indeed continues to regard this as non-essential business, then perhaps he could make his officials available for us and we will have a chance to have that discussion. The manner and the emotion of the people there deserves to have another hearing on that. Is that agreed? Agreed.

That concludes our consideration of public petitions this evening. I invite members of the public to submit petitions via our online portal at petitions.oireachtas.ie. A petition may be addressed to the Houses of the Oireachtas on a matter of general public concern or interest or an issue of public policy.

Do members wish to raise any issues under any other business? They do not.

There being no further issues, the committee is adjourned sine die. After the summer recess we will meet in private and public session. Thank you all.